Advertisements

"Vittorio" <> wrote in message
news:3hSac.965$...
> On my dual-boot (linux debian testing & windows xp) box under linux I
> have installed debian testing and the deb perl 5.6 packages boxed with
> the debian distribution.
>
> Now, using perl both under linux and win xp I've installed activestate
> perl 5.8 under M$ win and it looks great!
>
> The same activestate site offer a debianized perl-5.8 package which is
> installed under usr/local/bin.
>
> In the opinion of more experienced users than I am is there any
> advantage for me to install activestate perl instead of the standard deb
> packages?

I believe that debian testing is using perl 5.8, so probably the easiest
would be
# apt-get install perl
which will upgrade your perl to the current testing version along with
all dependencies
>
> Can both versions of perl coexist?

yes
>
> If I install activestate perl, could I eliminate the boxed debian perl
> packages (to avoid duplication, of course) or they're essential for the
> installation?

perl is used by many debian administration tools, but I have no idea if
they would happily use a /usr/local one instead of the debian one.

but as one of debian's strong points is its package system and
painless upgrading process, I would stick with their packages.

Advertisements

gnari wrote:
>perl is used by many debian administration tools, but I have no idea if
>they would happily use a /usr/local one instead of the debian one.

Dunno about Debian but...

In general, it's considered a bad idea to replace the perl that is used
by the system, by a custom one. Leave it there. If you don't like it
(because it's buggy, unextensible, whatever..) *add* a different
distribution on a different location. You're still free to choose for
your scripts which one to use, by changing the shebang line.

Vittorio <> wrote in message news:<3hSac.965$>...
> On my dual-boot (linux debian testing & windows xp) box under linux I
> have installed debian testing and the deb perl 5.6 packages boxed with
> the debian distribution.
>
> Now, using perl both under linux and win xp I've installed activestate
> perl 5.8 under M$ win and it looks great!
>
> The same activestate site offer a debianized perl-5.8 package which is
> installed under usr/local/bin.
>
> In the opinion of more experienced users than I am is there any
> advantage for me to install activestate perl instead of the standard deb
> packages?
>

With ActiveState on Win32, they have the ppm tool which simplifies
package installation (no need to compile modules locally):
ppm install File-Slurp
Maybe they have the same thing for Debian. That would be one benefit
to switching, IMHO.
> Can both versions of perl coexist?
>
> If I install activestate perl, could I eliminate the boxed debian perl
> packages (to avoid duplication, of course) or they're essential for the
> installation?
>

I don't know anything about Debian (I use *BSD), so I cannot help you
there.

Share This Page

Welcome to The Coding Forums!

Welcome to the Coding Forums, the place to chat about anything related to programming and coding languages.

Please join our friendly community by clicking the button below - it only takes a few seconds and is totally free. You'll be able to ask questions about coding or chat with the community and help others.
Sign up now!